V ET K R I N A R Y J U R I S V R U I) K NCR. 
473 
cumstances, they were perfectly justified in pronouncing Mr. Thornton a 
defaulter. He continued: — Mr. Thornton says he is not a defaulter, be- 
cause the assignees had not paid 20s. in the pound, according to their un- 
dertaking to him, and, that being so, he was not liable to any such imputa- 
tion ; but the Jockey Club says he is a defaulter, because he refuses to pay 
the bets he has lost. He would neither pay, nor go before the club to state 
his reasons for not doing so ; and if this was the case, Mr. Thornton, he con- 
tended, had no right to complain. Then why did he complain ? The ground 
of Mr. Thornton’s dissatisfaction was, that he had been announced in the 
public press as a defaulter. The jury would not fail to remember, that this 
was not the first time that this affair had made its appearance in the public 
prints. It hfld, before then, made considerable noise. It was for that reason 
that the communication now complained of appeared. The learned counsel 
then proceeded to contend that the article in question was not a libel in point 
of law; that the Jockey Club was the proper tribunal to decide upon such a 
case as that of Mr. Thornton; and that the only question was, had he been 
dealt with according to the laws of that tribunal ? If he had, and he trusted 
that the jury would be of opinion that he had, he firmly anticipated a verdict 
for the defendants. 
He then proceeded to call Mr. Guruey, who was examined by Mr. B 
Andrews. He said — I have for several years previously to 1841 been engaged 
in speculations connected with the turf. I know Mr. Thornton, the plaintiff. 
He has also been a large better, and attends at Tattersall’s. I made a great 
many bets on the Epsom races in 1841. I made several bets with Mr. 
Thornton. I won from him about <£1350. I attended at Tattersall’s on 
Monday, the 31st of May, the day before the settling-day. I compared 
books with some persons who were there on that day. I found that on 
balancing my account I was a winner of about <£1200. I saw Mr. Dixon 
at Tattersall’s. I had made bets with him on Epsom races. He was a # 
debtor of mine on our betting accounts. I did not authorize him to make 
any declaration that I would not attend to pay my bets on the next day. 
What did you say to him ? 
Witness. — The only observation I made was, “ that it were enough to 
make a man leave the yard and never enter it again ” 1 made use of those 
observations in consequence of his reporting that there would be a great many 
defaulters. I attended at Tattersall’s on Tuesday, the 1st of June. I took 
money with me, and also my betting-book. I applied to several gentlemen, 
amongst the rest Captain Higgins and Mr. Cloves, for a settlement. They 
said I must wait a little while, as there was a rumour that I was not going to 
settle my accounts. I did not learn from whom the report originated. I 
was not able to get any of the money that was owing to me. I never declared 
that I would not pay. When I found that 1 could not get paid what I had won, 
I left the yard, saying that I must apply to some one to settle my accounts 
for me. I said this publicly, and in such a manner that the people in the 
yard must have heard me. I was irritated at the time. To the best of my 
belief, I think Mr. England must have heard what I said. A few days after 
this I saw Mr. Portinan, Mr. Beale, and Mr. Clarke. They had an interview 
with me, the result of which was that I intrusted them with the settlement 
of my betting accounts. I gave them my balance-sheet and a written order 
to receive and pay for me. 
Cross-examined by the Solicitor-General. — I am a licensed victualler, 
and live at Walworth. I have been in the habit of attending at Tattersall’s for 
the last six or seven years. 
Mr. B. Andrews here interrupted the cross-examination, and said he had 
forgotten to ask the witness another question. The learned counsel then 
